Slashdot Mirror


Fructose As Culprit In the Obesity Epidemic

drewtheman writes "According to an interview with Dr. Robert Lustig, Professor of Pediatric Endocrinology from the University of California, San Francisco, fructose, once touted as diabetic-friendly because it doesn't raise insulin levels directly, could be a major culprit for the obesity epidemic, high blood pressure, and elevated blood levels of LDL in Americans and others worldwide as they adopt American-style diets. Fructose comprises 50% of table sugar and up to 90% of high-fructose corn syrup, both ingredients found in copious quantity in most American prepared foods."

58 of 821 comments (clear)

  1. Isn't that at obvious? by janrinok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Excessive quantities of anything is not good for the diet. It has been known for decades that high quantities of carbohydrates can cause weight increase. The confusion here is linking fructose as being good for diabetics (yes, and it still is in reasonable quantities) and excessive consumption of fructose leading to obesity.

    --
    Have a look at soylentnews.org for a different view
    1. Re:Isn't that at obvious? by Fyz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ah, the infamous and controversial "Don't stuff your face" argument...

  2. Not me by DrSkwid · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.freakonomics.com/pdf/whatmakesfoodfatte ning.pdf

    The Dietary and Nutritional Survey of British Adults, Gibson (1996, p. 405) concluded that "sugars
    appear to have a weak negative [italics added] association with BMI that is not totally explained
    by confounders such as dieting, under-reporting or the inverse correlation between energy from
    sugars and fat."

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  3. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by Optikschmoptik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How long have nutritionists been telling us this?

    At least as long as Fat Land has been out, but probably a bit longer than that. The story of American obesity is the story of American corn subsidies, which is therefore the story of high-fructose corn syrup and omnipresent, cheaper-than-water soda; and the story of vending machines and fast-food restaurants, 'family-style' Applebee's-like chains that exist solely to help burn off the excess corn stock by selling almost nothing but corn and its byproducts.

    Don't tell the presidential candidates though, they have to win in Iowa!

  4. Thank ADM, Cargill and their lobbyists. by jcr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Thanks to those motherfuckers, the sugar growers, and the congresscritters, we pay about three times what the rest of the world pays for sugar. That's why we get that corn syrup crap in soft drinks, and so much of the rest of our food.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Thank ADM, Cargill and their lobbyists. by MaelstromX · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're right, the sugar quotas and corn subsidies raise prices (directly or indirectly) for almost all consumable items. The jury is still out on whether HFCS truly is tied to obesity (there are studies that go both ways, and TFA adds as far as I can tell nothing new to the debate), but there is absolutely no question that it kills us economically.

      Just check out this research study that estimates that subtracting the benefits of the quotas/subsidies from the costs (i.e. consumer/producer benefits of lower costs minus "oh but the poor farming corporations!") leaves the American economy almost billion dollars per year better off.

    2. Re:Thank ADM, Cargill and their lobbyists. by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But the GP is right too. You don't HAVE to buy pre-processed foods. 95% of the crap sold in grocery stores just isn't good for you. You can buy the ingredients and make it yourself like your mother may have done.
      For poor people, even the ingredients that they can afford tend to be shit. High in fats, sugars and/or salt. Low quality meat and pre-processed canned/boxed foods are also much cheaper than fresh ingredients.

      Not to mention that some people's mothers are busy working two or more jobs and don't have time for anything besides a McDonalds quality dinner.

      http://foodstampchallenge.typepad.com/
      Voluntarily eating at/below the poverty level will change your perspective.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:Thank ADM, Cargill and their lobbyists. by Gabrill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sorry, but the less expensive arguement doesn't hold water. Homecooked food is faster than any restaurant food, but it's certainly not cheaper than boxed meals. Better, yes. Not cheaper.

      --
      Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
  5. Well maybe... by gowen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But the smart money is still on "Burgers".

    / and no concept of portion control.

    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    1. Re:Well maybe... by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Informative

      Lol. Insulin control the hunger kill switch for the body. People are eating things with fructose and they aren't getting this kill switch. If you over eat raw surgar, you body will generally cause you to throw up. We learned the second part in 7th grade home ec classes and the first in health.

      Corn syrup, or fructose used instead of sugar means that for most people, they are under fed as far as their body is concerned and telling them. This is why it is an issue. If regular sugar was used, the body's kill switch for eating would kick before a person ends up spending "every waking hour stuffing their faces with lard". Cause after all, what is lard but a form of sugar. Same with startches. Your body is good at sending signals to eat when it is deprived of something. And people are being deprived without knowing it.

      Now lets look at some more effects of fructose, low insulin means low amounts of energy which means the bodies metabolism slows down which means more food gets stored as fat while the body is sending signals to eat more. Do you see a cycle here that is more then some fatass stuffing his face because he can? I hope so otherwise the entire idea of the article is waisted on the space between you eyes and ears.

      And for the record, In america, you don't need to be eating donuts, candy, soda pop, and cakes to get the fructose. It is happily embeded in canned soups, frozen foods and all sorts of other things like the breakfast cereal that is supposed to be good for you. Chances are, if you don't make it from scratch, you will come into contact with it.

  6. And in other news......... by axia777 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pie is tasty and the sky will be blue tomorrow. No shit fructose is bad for us. It is pure simple sugars. The only fructose that IS good for humans is the fruit kind. And that is not simple sugar. Don't drink Soda Pop and always check the labels for High Fructose Corn Syrup. It is says it has it, don't buy it. That shit should be illegalized in most foods.

    1. Re:And in other news......... by Rosyna · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't drink Soda Pop and always check the labels for High Fructose Corn Syrup. It is says it has it, don't buy it. That shit should be illegalized in most foods.

      Why? HFCS and Sugar breaks down to the same things in the body. Every study I've seen shows that HFCS is no more dangerous than Sugar. Studies that only look at the Fructose show that high amounts of Fructose is dangerous. The HFCS in soft drinks and sport drinks is not high in Fructose. The "High Fructose" part of "High Fructose Corn Syrup" means it has a high content of fructose compared to corn syrup itself (which has next to no fructose).

      In fact, a happy paper at the NIH says pretty much this.

    2. Re:And in other news......... by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't confuse the issues.. Yes, sugar is bad for you in large amounts, but real sugar is a whole lot better than the corn sugar crap that is used everywhere in the US. The nice thing about real sugar is that it is a natural appetite inhibitor, which means that you will not be hungry after drinking a non-US produced Coca-Cola, in fact you are more likely to forget to eat all together, since Cafeine is also a appetite inhibitor (Many European computer nerds are unhealthly skinny as a result).

      The problem is the corn sirup, that both contains high amounts of carbs, and will leave you hungry after drinking it.

    3. Re:And in other news......... by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 4, Informative

      From my read of TFA, fructose breaks down in the body the way alcohol does. The liver has to do all the work (glucose is mainly broken down directly in muscles and organs, where it is useful), and turns it to fat, while not raising insulin levels. Not raising insulin levels means the body doesn't know it has enough sugar already, which means apetite doesn't decrease in the amount it should.

      Now, fruits have the exact same fructose in it. Why are fruits better? For one, they come with other nutrients. For another, to consume the amount of fructose in a glass of coke, you'd have to eat a whole bushel of apples. The logistics prevent you from overindulging in fruits, while soda's are all about overindulging.

  7. Re:Nasty aftertaste by steve86-ed · · Score: 5, Funny

    Personally, I can't stand all the corn syrup the Americans seem to have in everything they eat. Maybe this is my body's way of saying "get the hell out of this silly country before you become one of them!"?


    If you don't like it, you can leave. We don't need no whinny Euro-cans telling us not to devour copious amounts of corn syrup and sugars. And stop calling me an American. America is huge, I just live in the best part of it, the USA. That makes me a Citizen of the United States of America, but you can shorten that down to a CUSA. From now on when you want to badmouth the best nation on Earth, you can address us as Cusans. It's about time we had our own identity.

    I think all the corn syrup has gone to my head...
  8. A must read NYTimes story on corn & corn syrup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This ran a few years ago and was REALLY interesting. Corn in america == money. Farmers have a corn glut to deal with. 100 years ago, they put the extra corn to work as alcohol (whiskey), and soon we had a nation of alcoholics. So then they came up with corn syrup. That hasn't worked out too well considering how fat Americans are.

    Next up-- ethanol!

  9. Not that I'm a skeptic... by Kyrubas · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...but where is a link to the paper or actual report? I just don't trust an interview as easily when it comes to scientific claims as I would the scientific data and whatever fallacies it may hold.

    On another note, there have been plenty of studies already demonstrating how nutritionally bad fructose is bad for an individual. Here's a compilation I found awhile back of the cons of using fructose so widely in consumables: http://curezone.com/art/read.asp?ID=32&db=6&C0=17

  10. Rule of Thumb by Dukaso · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here's a decent rule of thumb when it comes to eating food: If you don't know understand what the ingredients are when you may not want to consume it. Pick up any random piece of junk food and read the ingredient panel. Kudos to you if you can even pronounce everything correctly.

  11. That fructose corn syrup ain't free. by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Interesting
    In Capitalist West US corn industry taxes you.
    In Soviet Russia CIA spoils Cuban sugar for you.

    Have you US cubicle jockeys ever thought about how much you are locked into corn syrup?
    A few sick fat 'end users' will not stop the protectionism, tariffs and congress critters.
    You have a huge set of new tax credits, grants and loans flowing into big corn for 'ethanol'
    Then you have state subsidies.

    Do you want to sell sugar water for the rest of your life and own the world?

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  12. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by JanneM · · Score: 5, Interesting

    and the story of vending machines and fast-food restaurants,

    There is something to what you write. But, here in Japan vending machines are absolutely everywhere - really, it's crazy; I walked about 3km every morning to my previous job, in a partly rural area and I realized that there was not a single spot along the route where I could not see at least one vending machine. And there has always been lots and lots of fast-food here as well as takeout meals; many traditional Japanese dishes like soba, onigiri, oden and so on are meant to eat quickly from a counter or street vendor cart, or while going from place to place, and the bento meal is ubiquitous. A traditional Japanese meal, furthermore, is an orgy in "grazing" behavior, with dozens of small dishes to eat in turn.

    No, while "fast-food" style serving may contribute to creating bad habits, the main culprit is still what people eat, and how much of it, not how you eat it. Most Japanese meals just aren't very fattening; while you often have some part of the meal that is fatty or calorie-rich, you don't get much of it, while you often do get large amounts of vegetables, pickles and other lean stuff. A steak, for instance, may be 100 grams or so, and be just one dish of a dozen you get for your meal.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
  13. On the other hand... by julesh · · Score: 3, Informative

    Fructose used responsibly is actually beneficial. Fructose is substantially sweeter than glucose, so consuming it could allow you to reduce your sugar intake. Consuming as much fructose as you would otherwise consume glucose is clearly bad for you, but there is an opportunity to reduce intake.

    The HFCS used in most soft drinks is (I believe) 50% fructose. It is metabolised almost identically to sucrose: there is an initial enzyme that splits sucrose into glucose and fructose at similar ratios to the contents of the corn syrup, after that the metabolism is identical. It seems unlikely therefore that there is any substantial difference in health effects, and most of the studies quoted in the wikipedia article linked from the main story tend to agree with that.

  14. um no by eneville · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hate articles like this. The reader should not be blaming a single food as a CAUSE for obesity. The cause is that the consumer should not be eating large quantities of anything. Personally if anything is to blame then its the consumer for not getting off their ass and actually preparing food, going for a bike ride, or doing some running. Simple exercise like washing up has now been replaced with a dish washer, we mow lawns with electric/petrol mowers, and we don't even write letters by hand either, soon voice recognition will replace keyboard work. When will the world learn that as physical creatures we depend on a good, fresh diet and plenty of exercise.

  15. Personal experience... by 3seas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Having been thin most all my life but finding I had high cholesterol, I was prescribed a popular anti-cholesterol medicine. I began to gain weight passing up what is normal for my height. But my doctor and chiropractor wanted me to lose weight, just 10 pounds. I found out about HFCS and eliminated it from my diet and within a few months lost 30 lbs.
    And all I did was remove HFCS from my diet.

    I suspect since the anti-cholesterol medicine has an effect on the liver, and apparently HFCS is mostly processed by the Liver, has something to do with my weight gain once on the meds.

    Now this article suggest other sugars also contribute. I suppose I need to further reduce my sugar intake.

    But here is a HFCS tip: Bread! I would buy bread that didn't have HFCS in it and git used to which brand I'd buy. Then I discovered that all the bread I was buying had the ingredients changed to include HFCS. And this I discovered after the cola industry said they would stop selling their HFCS drinks at schools. I guess the HFCS industry simply shifted what they include it in. So the school kids still get it????

    Nasty corn industry!!

    Seems to me the corn industry needs to be heavily taxed where teh tax is used for health care..... like cigarettes..

  16. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by Optikschmoptik · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, while "fast-food" style serving may contribute to creating bad habits, the main culprit is still what people eat

    First of all, you walked about 6 times the distance that might be considered the maximum for an American before getting into a car and driving :) . But yeah, of course, it's what is in the vending machines that counts. Next time you're in the States, see if you can buy something from a vending machine without some type of corn or corn-syrup or corn-byproduct as a major ingredient (sometimes it's even in 'diet' products, which have their own set of health threats). I won't say it's impossible, but it's not easy either. The stuff is cheap as dirt to produce, and has long been known to be extremely efficient for conversion and storage as fat.

    Fast-food in the States is essentially cheap food. It's there because its corn-syrup ingredients are so cheap to produce and easy to maintain and transport (bonus: it doubles as a preservative). Most of this vending-machine / fast-food / suburban-feed-bag (TGIFriday's et al.) industry is built around this cheapness and ease. They are symptoms. I would guess that vending machines in Japan are the result of a different economic cause.

  17. Re:Fructose comprises of table sugar and corn syru by SpeedyDX · · Score: 3, Informative

    No, you just need an English lesson.

    When A comprises B, it means A is within B, whether it is in whole or in part.
    When A IS comprised OF B, it means B is within A, whether it is in whole or in part.

    Consider another verb for a simpler example:
    Baked dough makes cookies.
    Cookies are made of baked dough.

  18. What is with High Fructose Corn Syrup? by MosesJones · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Everytime I travel to the US and look at the ingredients its there on the side of the can every single time. Over in europe we use this amazing new invention called "sugar" instead.

    So its not quite true to say that America are shipping the crap that is High Fructose Corn Syrup on the rest of the world, its actually that AMERICAN companies are using that on AMERICANS and using more natural ingredients outside of the US. This appears to be due to costs (its cheaper to use HFCS in the US, as sugar imports are penalised) meaning that the world's richest economy is using the cheapest and crappiest ingredients.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
  19. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by JanneM · · Score: 4, Informative

    But yeah, of course, it's what is in the vending machines that counts. Next time you're in the States, see if you can buy something from a vending machine without some type of corn or corn-syrup or corn-byproduct as a major ingredient (sometimes it's even in 'diet' products, which have their own set of health threats).

    Yes, the contents are rather different. In most drink vending machines, most drinks are cold or hot green teas and coffee, with a smaller amount of juices, water and sports drinks. Actual carbonated soda is very rare; it's not that unusual to see even Coca Cola vending machines that don't actually sell cola.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
  20. Re:I gave up HFCS for new years... by hazem · · Score: 5, Informative

    Heinz finally makes an "organic" ketchup that uses cane sugar instead of HFCS for sweetener. It actually tastes a lot better - like I remember it tasting as a kid. I've also seen other brands of ketchup that use regular sugar as well.

    I personally gave up HFCS and MSG to the best of my ability about 9 months ago. I'm still too fat (probably all the beer I still drink) but I do feel much much better. That near continuous run-down feeling is gone now. So is that all to frequent feeling after lunch like a bad flu was coming (buzzing in my head, hot flash, sweating, tightness in the chest, congested feeling).

    I'm sure someone will respond saying there's no scientific proof that MSG and HFSC are bad for me and that I'm a fool for trying to not consume them. That's just fine... call me a fool. I feel better not eating them and that's reason enough - placebo effect or not.

  21. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The difference is that Japanese vending machines mainly sell soiled schoolgirl panties.

  22. 11 types... by elysium-os · · Score: 4, Funny

    "There are 11 types of people in the world, those who know binaries and those who don't."

    Ok so you don't, I do, but who is in the 3th group?

    1. Re:11 types... by Kangburra · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ok so you don't, I do, but who is in the 3th group?


      Muth be thomebody elth.
      --
      Common sense is not so common
  23. Awesome report by mattr · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This is really interesting. Two questions for anyone with knowledge.


    1. Lustig says:

    Well it's glycaemic index plus fibre. Fibre turns any food into a low glycaemic load food. In fact we are supposed to eat our carbohydrate with fibre, that's the key. Processed wheat is white, when you go out into the field it's brown but by the time it gets to your bakery it's white. What happened? Well the bran was stripped off, well the bran is the good part, the bran is what we're supposed to be eating.

    So if we eat significant fiber with everything we ingest does everything become low GI? Or what? This will definitely make me eat French bread (if that has bran?) and no more white bread (which I have known is a "slab of sugar" but didn't really use that knowledge). And what is a compact source of fiber? I doubt you could drink a cola with HFCS and neutralize its evil with a graham cracker (if that has bran in it?) but what's the score there?


    2. The experiment in which a drug was administered to children whose brains could not detect leptin resulted in the kids spontaneously working out, doing sports, eliminating soda from their diet, etc. I'd like to know what the kids thought / felt during the study, and want to know if we can "fool" ourselves into doing the same kind of activities and getting a similar effect, in effect bootstrapping a similar kind of health benefit without taking the drug Octreotide. (and what is that drug, sounds pretty strong!)


    3. Extremely refreshing and seemingly sensible comments about why it is important to exercise. This has got to be massively important for geeks. Personally I had an obese father who as a doctor unfortunately must have been an ultrageek since he didn't want to do any sports that could hurt his hands (since he couldn't do surgery). He got diabetes. I've been heavy (not astoundingly, but overweight) since I was little and he encouraged me to sit in my room and play with my Apple II all summer I remember well, and now after he got diabetes and bypasses he said "turns out I was wrong, exercise is important!" I coulda killed him!


    So anyway this is quite important and felt like a revelation: While calories are one thing I thought exercise was basically to boost the metabolism to burn food faster. Well this article says exercise increases skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity (so less insulin is made so less blood sugar is shunted into fat), lowers cortisol (which is a "megastress hormone" that the article says triggers deposition of bad fat, and finally detoxifies fructose.

    These are all awesomely understandable reasons why you gotta exercise and at least to me at this moment it makes me want to throw this glass of diet cola (who cares! anything unhealthy!) off the table and never look a piece of white bread in the face again. Now we need some "best practices" or programming style guides that include exercise with this info in it, of course optimized for maximum concentration and efficiency with minimum weight gain.

    1. Re:Awesome report by Budenny · · Score: 3, Informative

      The remarks about bran are only partially correct. All bran is not the same. Wheat bran, contrary to the implication, is bad for you and has no dietary benefits. It irritates the intestines and blocks the absorption of nutrients. It is a myth that whole wheat bread has more vitamins and minerals and is therefore better for you than white bread. Yes, it has more vitamins and minerals. No it is not therefore better for you, because they are not accessible. What matters is not what is in it, what matters is what you can get out of it. The problem is phytates, which prevent absorption of minerals.

      The right way to eat wheat bread is the way that was traditional until the rise of the steam baked industrial rapid rise loaf. That is,first, a slow fermenting rise, usually overnight. This makes the bread both lower GI index, and also more digestible. Second, flour which is not whole wheat but is relatively high extraction. This the so called grey flour of traditional French bread. Until modern times, when people talked about 'white' bread, what they meant was bread without the bran, a greyish color, but containing the germ.

      The extraction rate varies from 75% or less for conventional white flour to 85% for brown but not wholewheat flour. In countries where bread is the staple, the extraction rate is usually in the low eighties and this is probably the sensible level. The rate in the US during WWII was raised to 80% - similarly in the UK, or perhaps a little higher. It would be a dramatic step forward for modern diets if it could be placed at that level today.

      The same points apply to rice bran, which also should be avoided. It is striking that traditional cultures with long histories of healthy eating invariably mill rice and refine wheat, but never try remove oat bran. Both wheat and rice bran are better used by feeding to poultry, when the conversion into high quality protein is a much better use for it than irritating the human bowel to no nutritional effect.

      Oat bran is in a completely different category. It does not irritate the bowel, and its nutrients are available. I believe the same to be true of spelt.

      Its worth remarking that probably one of the main causes of obesity is the obsession with the low fat diet. Without any real evidence, we have embarked on a gigantic nutritional experiment in the Anglo Saxon countries over the last 30-40 years. We have gone from diets which were reasonably balanced in terms of saturated fats and complex carbohydrates, to ones which attempted to eliminate all saturated fats. However, the natural and normal craving for some fats has led to the substitution of polyunsaturated fats for saturated. There is no evidence that this is healthy, and much that it is far worse. In addition, since the available high carb foods are highly refined, we have then substitued for potatoes, rice and pasta, much sugar, including fructose. The result is a diet far worse than what we started with, and one which our evolutionary history has never prepared us for.

      It is not an accident that this has happened at a time that the health food movement has metamorphosed into the supplements industry.

      So what should we eat? Liberal amounts of meat, fish eggs butter and full-fat, non-homogenized milk. Absolutely no refined vegetable oils. Moderate amounts of mono-unsaturated vegetable oils (olive and peanut). No corn oil, safflower oil, hydrogenated vegetable oil, margarine. Liberal amounts of vegetables of all sorts. Liberal amounts of sourdough bread made with coarse white flour. Similarly pasta. White, not brown, rice. Parboiled is OK. Fruits in season. And fruit juice, if at all, in great moderation.

      Exercise well, and stay off the scales! Because the other great cause of obesity in Western society is the practice of dieting, which, as many studies have shown, simply leads to long term weight gain.

  24. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by superdude72 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Japanese meal you describe sounds somewhat healthier than the American fast food diet of:

    Two beef patties slathered with carbohydrate-rich condiments sandwiched between carbohydrate-rich bread, served with a side of carbohydrate-rich french fries and a 32 oz. cup of high fructose corn syrup. All super-sized because the marginal cost of the ingredients is so low, it is profitable for the restaurants to offer extra portions for a premium.

    The innocuous-seeming bun, even, is so loaded with refined carbohydrates that you might as well be eating your hamburger in the middle of a donut sliced in half.

  25. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    There's probably some truth in that. I spent some time in a Japanese town slightly smaller than the one I grew up near in the UK. When I got on the bus, I was given something that looked like a raffle ticket, with a number indicating where I got on. At the front was a big board explaining how much people with each numbered ticket had to pay to get of at each stop. When I got off, I was expected to just drop the ticket and the money down a hole by the driver. The driver had no way of telling exactly how much I'd paid.

    When I asked what happens if people don't have enough change on them, I was told that generally they pay a bit more the next time they ride. I'd love to have a system like that here, since it would save a lot of time with people buying bus tickets when they got on at each stop, but I can't imagine it working with the average British person, who would just see it as a way to avoid paying for the service. It seems to be not so much an issue of how law-abiding the Japanese are as the culture of respect.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  26. Personal Experience by 605dave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A few years ago I became aware of HFCS, and was amazed at how pervasive it is. With the birth of my son I needed to lose weight, and was starting to really be aware of what I ate. I changed two things about my lifestyle. I eliminated almost all HFCS (mostly sodas), and started exercising more regularly. I lost 60 pounds, and have kept it off. I don't know about any of the scientific arguments, but my experience tells me HFCS has a big role to play in out society's weight issues. There are other factors, including exercise which I mentioned. But if you want to get creeped out, go to a convenience store and try to find something without corn syrup in some form. Perhaps the weight loss can party be credited to the fact that I eat better foods and drink more water by avoiding HFCS. But the bottom line is this. For me, getting rid of HFCS either caused me to lose weight directly, or forced me to eat healthier by avoiding it.

    --
    Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
  27. Rice Syrup by Potor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Use rice syrup, which contains no fructose. You can substitute it 1:1 for corn syrup.

    I use it to make all sorts of treats, including marshmallows.

  28. Summary of article by amyhughes · · Score: 5, Informative

    Clearly people aren't taking the time to read the article (I'm shocked), so here's a summary of the fructose info...

    Our consumption of fructose has gone from less than half a pound per year in 1970 to 56 pounds per year in 2003.

    high fructose corn syrup came on the market after it was invented in Japan in 1966, and started finding its way into American foods in 1975. In 1980 the soft drink companies started introducing it into soft drinks and you can actually trace the prevalence of childhood obesity, and the rise, to 1980 when this change was made.

    it's not the calories that are different it's the fact that the only organ in your body that can take up fructose is your liver. Glucose, the standard sugar, can be taken up by every organ in the body, only 20% of glucose load ends up at your liver. So let's take 120 calories of glucose, that's two slices of white bread as an example, only 24 of those 120 calories will be metabolised by the liver, the rest of it will be metabolised by your muscles, by your brain, by your kidneys, by your heart etc.. Now let's take 120 calories of orange juice. Same 120 calories but now 60 of those calories are going to be fructose because fructose is half of sucrose and sucrose is what's in orange juice. So it's going to be all the fructose, that's 60 calories, plus 20% of the glucose, so that's another 12 out of 60 -- so in other words 72 out of the 120 calories will hit the liver, three times the substrate as when it was just glucose alone.

    fructose [does] three things that are particularly bad in the liver. The first is this uric acid pathway that I just mentioned, the second is that fructose initiates what's known as de novo lipogenesis...Which is fat production...Excess fat production and so VLDL [the bad form of cholesterol], very low density lipoproteins end up being manufactured when you consume this large bolus of fructose in a way that glucose does not, and so that leads to dyslipidaemia.

    And then the last thing that fructose does in the liver is it initiates an enzyme called Junk one, ...and when you initiate Junk one what happens is that your insulin receptor in your liver stops working...that means your insulin levels all over your body have to rise.

    put all of this together and basically you've got a feed forward system of increased insulin, increased liver fat, liver deposition of fat, increased inflammation -- you end up with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. You end up with your inability to see your leptin [**leptin tells your brain you are full**] and so you consume more fructose and you've now got a viscious cycle out of control.

    In fact fructose, because of the way it's metabolised, is actually damaging your liver the same way alcohol is. In fact it's the exact same pathway, in fact fructose is alcohol without the buzz.

  29. Sadly by aepervius · · Score: 5, Informative

    I took organic chemistry so I understand what the ingredient are (at least on the basic structural level) and can pronunce them very well ;).

    Anyway the argument is a bad one (and remind me of the argument of people saying "oh god they are adding chemicals in our food") If you took normal organic growing food and we told you the list of stuff inside it, you would not understand half of it, still that would not make it more or less dangerous. 2-oxo-L-threo-hexono-1,4- lactone-2,3-enediol is an example of it. Naturally I could call it L-ascorbate too. Or maybe vitamin C. The problem are not that people don't understand what the smallest ingredient part in ppm or milli% of their food composition is, the problem is that people ignore totally the composition of the main ingredient, like fat, and refuse to do sport, and eat a lot during the day way way more than is necessary for their activities, and not equilibrated. It is a LIFESTYLE problem. It ain't one signle factor but a combination of many. And no, the ingredient you can't pronunce without having being in university ain't the problem.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  30. Passing on sugar is a very good start. by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 3, Informative

    "There are plenty of ways to get obese and, yes, shockingly, the most common ones include eating all sorts of calorie rich food without giving your body a way to expend those calories."

    That's true to an extent, but our bodies are in fact designed to expel unneeded calories. The sensitivity of these triggers seems to differ from person to person, which is one reason some people can eat anything they want without gaining weight, while others can count calories and still become obese.

    I was in the latter group. Exercising daily and eating quite well, yet ending up in my mid-twenties at an overweight 230 pounds. It turns out carbohydrates -- and especially sugars like fructose -- cause a rapid blood sugar spike and insulin production, which in turn triggers your body to conserve excess calories in fat cells. At last, I stopped eating less and started eating differently -- no sugars and starches, but plenty of protein and fat -- and dropped 75 pounds so quickly I astonished everyone I knew. Without the carb/insulin trigger, your body naturally uses only the calories it needs and eliminates the rest.

    --
    He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
  31. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Less about respect, and more about fear of being ostracized. Sure you'll get away with it a few times, but not too many times. People have eyes, and you really never get to hear what other people say about you in Japan. Pretty important stuff when you generally end up getting to know your community better since your on foot allot more, and on public transportation. Once you are caught, and have a black mark for doing something bad, you'll spend a damn long time clawing your way outa that hole if you ever can. It's easy to sluff off personal guilt in other countries, but in one thats so entrenched with the idea of personal guilt...it's hard to have it not rub off on you after a while. Theres others, but thats a big one I've noticed.

  32. Re:Nasty aftertaste by vertinox · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Personally, I can't stand all the corn syrup the Americans seem to have in everything they eat. Maybe this is my body's way of saying "get the hell out of this silly country before you become one of them!"?

    Personally, I'm an American, but I hate American food. If I could afford it, I'd just shop at the international shops and bring home 50lbs of Japanese snacks. Of course I'm sure your not supposed to eat that in large quantities either, but for some reason pocky and ramen never makes me feel fat.

    But more seriously, I think the problem is more cultural than anything else. Most popular American foods are deep fried (Mmmm... Onion Rings) and probably not meant for human consumption (Mmmmm... Pulled Pork Sandwhiches) and that the reason for obesity in America is that we haven't really scaled our fatty foods to match our supply.

    As in... These were good for you in the 1920's when the lack of food was an issue for most Americans, but now... Not so good.

    We need to focus on just not cooking foods in fat or deep fry them. Plenty of good stuff out there that you can eat a lot of and still not get fat.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  33. That foodstamp challenge is BS by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Informative

    Largely because they seem to have made no attempt to really buy cheap foods. The biggest one would be rice. You can get an amazing amount of calories from rice and that shit is dirt cheap. It is also soaks up flavours really well so you can season it easily, and cheaply. You should be able to get rice in a 50 pound bag for around $14. Now given that you get about 220 calories per cup and a cup weighs 7 oz or so that's about 25,000 calories per bag, or a while weeks worth of calories for one large person.

    Using that as a staple, you find that you now have more to spend on other things. You also will discover that rice is quite healthy.

    Now please don't think I'm arguing that people should have to live off of a couple bucks a day for food, but realise that these congress people aren't doing it right. When it comes to really cutting food budget, you don't go to White Castle. You concentrate on materials which are cheap and have good calorie content. Rice is essentially the unbeatable champ in that area and hence forms your staple (it is not such a coincidence that it often forms the staple of diets for people more poor than is even conceivable in the US). Beans also work well, especially when purchased bagged and not canned, and they supply protein. Beans and rice, though not glorious, are just about enough on their own to sustain you.

    If they are serious about seeing how to live on an extremely low budget for food, they should at least make an honest effort.

    1. Re:That foodstamp challenge is BS by jafiwam · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Staples yes.

      Try getting enough servings of fresh green vegetables for a family of four on a budget.

      Here's a hint:

      Fresh spinach for four ($12) ($9 if you can find the unbagged bunches, seriously!)

      Broccoli for four ($3)

      Tomatoes (four large) ($3)

      I could go on and on.

      The "poor" lifestyle staple of rice and beans (arguably probably the most cost effective way) with enough veggies doesn't exist.

      You CANT get enough good veggies on that budget. You could get low quality frozen. Or if you are lucky get one of those local "farm share" subscriptions ($30 per month for half share of random crap squash, who the fuck needs a whole case of squash at a time?) The idea you can get tasty veggies for cheap is simply bullshit.

    2. Re:That foodstamp challenge is BS by canadian_right · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Those prices are in the States? I've read that all the foods that are actually good for you to eat do NOT get subsidies, while corn and other grains (mainly used to feed pigs and cattle) get the subsidies. See Slow Food for more information.

      We import our vegetables except for July and August, and they are still cheaper than that what you listed. In fact, buying only fresh fruit, veggies, and meat will make my grocery bill about 30% to 50% lower than if I buy processed foods. We import from the USA and and S. America.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    3. Re:That foodstamp challenge is BS by pragma_x · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Right on all counts for things here in the USA. Having minimized my budget for groceries for several years now, I've noticed that even buying stuff on sale nets me a buttload lot of sugar and salt and few vitamins and minerals. For the most part, if you want healthy food (outside of rice and beans), you have to pay extra.

      However, what a lot of folks don't realize is that this applies (for the exception of artifical market pressures generated by subsidies) mostly to chain stores that have min/maxed their business model to cater to customer tastes. As people get more accustomed to eating garbage, stores just put more of that crap on the shelves. For instance, I had to stop shopping at the local Safeway simply because the produce was routinely rotting in the bins since nobody was buying it. Stand outside for five minutes and you can easily see that few folks here know how to take care of themselves - it's just cart after cart of microwave dinners and sugar filled "juice-boxes" and ramen for the kids.

      One thing I have done is to go to "ethnic" grocery stores where everything is substantially cheaper, rather than shopping a large chain grocery store. Mark my words: immigrants know how to eat! The produce is plentiful and fresher, the meat is half the cost and tastier, I can get "exotic" ingredients unavailable elsewhere... who cares if nobody speaks English? In the case of the local Korean market, there's even a fishmonger where they'll clean your fresh fish however you want. The hispanic/latin markets around town also routinely have stuff like plantain and avacado for half of what you'd pay at the "normal" store.

      Cash-only staples stores (like Aldi) are another way to go, but I haven't gone that route in 7 years. They're awesome for budget shopping. I'd imagine that non-gourmet co-op stores might also be good move for most people.

  34. Dang sugary buns. by Valdrax · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you've never done it, go low-carb for a month. For many Americans, you can kind of cheat on this by simply not drinking sweet drinks and not eating candy or other sweets for a month -- you don't have to go full anti-bread and pasta and rice. Cut out diet drinks too and just drink water or unsweetened tea.

    Somewhere over the course of this month, you will begin to realize just how much sugar is hidden in fast food. McDonalds and Burger King buns as well as Pizza Hut pizza sauce taste repulsively sweet once you're no longer used to a certain minimum amount of sugar in each meal. I've tried to avoid fast food ever since I did this a few years ago by accident when I tried to switch to only drinking water to save money and lose weight. It's really obscene.

    (Unfortunately, after long enough not drinking sugary drinks, you do become used to the flavor and learn to ignore it in fast food again, but it's still an eye opener as long as you remember it.)

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  35. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by Eccles · · Score: 3, Informative

    The BS is the /. article summary. From the transcript:

    Robert Lustig: Well high fructose corn syrup, it should say that, now in Australia for instance the sodas don't have high fructose corn syrup they have sucrose. Well sucrose is half fructose. You know a lot has been made over this high fructose corn syrup being particularly evil. In fact high fructose corn syrup is either 42% or 55% fructose, the rest is glucose. Well sucrose is 50% fructose the rest is glucose. In fact high fructose corn syrup and sucrose are equally problematic.

    Norman Swan: Basically table sugar.

    Robert Lustig: Table sugar -- that's right. We were not designed to eat all of this sugar, we're supposed to be eating our carbohydrate, particularly our fructose, with high fibre. Well the fact is we have 100 pound bags of sugar that go into the cakes, and the donuts.

    Norman Swan: So we don't need to get obsessed on fruit sugars, it's sugar itself, sucrose.

    Robert Lustig: Absolutely, it's sugar in general.

    ---

    So don't blame the article, blame the summarizer. I've read (but can't link) that the difference between the current American diet and the diet in the 50's is almost exclusively the amount of sugar eaten.

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  36. Re:Film at 11 by vtcodger · · Score: 3, Interesting
    ***Sugar makes you fat? Who'd have thought?!***

    Well, excess calories certainly are a problem. But Fructose in large doses has the peculiar (and unintuitive) property that much of it is converted more or less directly to fat rather than energy in the liver. Glucose OTOH is metabolized throughout the body. The body seems to be designed to work with a carbohydrate mix that consists of mostly of glucose derived from starch and sugar plus a bit of fructose from fruit and sugar, as well as (for infants and those of European ancestry) a bit of galactose from dairy products.

    The body can convert fructose to glucose and burn it. But only in modest doses. When the fructose level gets high, the bod stashes the excess for future consumption ... as fat.

    Here's a link to a lengthy article that addresses all this http://www.medbio.info/Horn/Time%201-2/carbohydrat e_metabolism.htm

    --
    You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
  37. Misplaced priorities by FranTaylor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's funny with people: you threaten to take away their donuts and their soda, and they get all riled up, but you take away their civil liberties, and they don't seem to care very much.

    1. Re:Misplaced priorities by ghettoimp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, isn't being able to eat what you want a matter of freedom? In fact, it seems to me it's more basic than most of the freedoms we talk about on slashdot.

      I'd certainly like people to eat well, and I'd like the companies that produce our food to do so more ethically and with a greater concern for our well-being as consumers. But if someone wants to eat donuts and soda, that's their choice, and who am I to deny them that choice?

  38. Re:Nasty aftertaste by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most people who smugly criticize America from abroad are European. If they angrily criticize America for what it did to their country, they're from South America or the Middle East. If they laugh at how much money they make off stupid Americans, they're from Asia.

    The one exception is that Britons seem to have some understanding that their food is scarcely better than ours.

  39. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by gludington · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The innocuous-seeming bun, even, is so loaded with refined carbohydrates that you might as well be eating your hamburger in the middle of a donut sliced in half.

    I know you meant this as a joke, but, as always, life is one step ahead, at least if you go to a Gateway Grizzlies Baseball Game. From the press release on "Baseball's Best Burger"

    "May 12, 2006 - The Grizzlies and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts have teamed up to create "Baseball's Best Burger." The burger, which was debuted at the Grizzlies' December 10th sale, consists of a thick and juicy burger topped with sharp cheddar cheese and two slices of bacon. The burger is then placed in between each side of a Krispy Kreme Original Glazed doughnut."

    They credit at Atlanta restauarant for inspiration, so a bacon donut cheeseburger is probably older than that. And we need studies to figure out why there is an obesity epidemic?

  40. Glucose-fructose syrup is worse still. by Sir+Holo · · Score: 3, Informative

    The body regulates the rate of breakdown of sucrose (into fructose and glucose) through the enzyme sucrase. Ingesting fructose-glucose mixtures bypasses your body's regulation mechanism, resulting in faster uptake and greater stress on the body's other sugar-regulation mechanisms, such as insulin.

    In the end, greater stress on a body system results in it wearing out sooner, hence the epidemic of adult-onset diabetes.

    High-fructose corn syrup is NOT the same as sucrose. People with sucrose intolerance lack the enzyme and cannot properly digest sucrose.

  41. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by BeanThere · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was also struck by some of the 'honesty-based' systems in Malaysia. E.g. some restaurants had a buffet-like system where there are various types of dishes and you just go and dish up whatever you want and then eat it. At the end you go stand in a queue and then tell the cashier what you had, and they simply take your word for it and ring it up. And it works.

  42. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by badasscat · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actual carbonated soda is very rare; it's not that unusual to see even Coca Cola vending machines that don't actually sell cola.

    Carbonated soda is not "very rare". And Coca Cola machines without soda only exist when other Coca Cola machines *with* soda sit right next to them.

    Japanese vending machines almost always exist in multiple units - it's actually uncommon to see a single vending machine by itself. In the event that you *do*, that vending machine will *always* have at least one, and usually two or more flavors of carbonated soda. When vending machines are paired together, they have one particular kind of drink in each, so yes, of course you will only find carbonated drinks in one out of the four or five machines in any given spot. But they're always there.

    This is a typical single-unit Suntory machine installation:
    http://www.japonophile.com/wp-content/uploads/2004 -2006/jihanki.jpg

    And the same for Coke:
    http://z.about.com/d/gojapan/1/0/8/2/machine2.gif

    This is a more common multi-machine installation:
    http://www.tjf.or.jp/deai_korea/contents/teacher/m ini_en/pic_mini/life031.jpg

    (I know the url says "korea", but that's Japan. Here is the original page it's from.)

    It is true that Japan has much more variety of drink types in their vending machines than we do. But I disagree that their drinks are all that much healthier. Their vending machines contain drinks of the following types:

    a) Canned iced coffee - always sweetened
    b) Soda
    c) Beer
    d) Sweetened, processed juice drinks (their equivalent to "Sunny Delight")
    e) Iced tea (unsweetened)

    Of those, only tea is even remotely healthy and calorie-free. And it's true that it's usually available for those who want it. But then, diet soda is always available at vending machines here too; not as healthy as tea, but at least calorie-free and non-obesity forming. Most people choose something else, in both countries.

    Our problem is portion control. The standard bottle size in vending machines here is 20oz. A Japanese canned coffee is I think 7oz. Big difference. We're drinking almost three times the sugar in our sugar drinks as they are, just because we're drinking a lot more of it. (This extends beyond vending machines too; go to McDonald's there and the "large" drink is the same size as a "small" here.)

    Combined with the rest of their diet, which is a lot less fatty and rich in calories, and with a lot smaller portions, and of course they're in better shape. Though with the rise of fast food there, they're fattening up now just like we already have. (Most articles on this are a bit alarmist, IMO - it's still obvious that they're in pretty good shape, but obesity rates are rising.)

    It's really not rocket science why we're all getting fat. Too many calories, too big portions. It drives me crazy how people read stuff like "fructose makes you fat!" and think they can just cut out fructose and lose weight. Meanwhile, they're still eating double quarter pounders with cheese, a large fries and two apple pies for lunch and wondering why they're still getting fat. The culprit to gaining weight is calories. That's it. Simple laws of physics. All of these foods that supposedly "cause" obesity do so because they are high in calories and low in nutrients. That includes fructose. The bottom line is you need to control your calorie intake, which means both controlling the types of food you eat as well as the amounts.

  43. Re:from the "no shit" dept. by geobeck · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's just the opposite of greater Vancouver's SkyTrain system. There are ticket machines in the lobby of every station. You buy a ticket before getting on, or you carry your monthly pass with you. There are no turnstiles, and fare fraud is rampant, up to 40% by some estimates. It's not just walking on without paying, but paying for a lesser fare. (You have to pay more to go into a more distant zone.)

    Before adding a second line a few years ago, they did a cost/benefit analysis, and decided that it was cheaper to hire more enforcement staff than to install a mechanical enforcement system. So now, when you ride, there's a one in five chance that a pair of enforcement officers are going to get on and check tickets. Almost every time I've seen enforcement officers on the train, they've caught at least one person.

    They're usually pretty lenient if a person seems sincere about forgetting an extra zone fare... total BS almost every time, but they want to maintain good PR. But I saw a couple of kids get caught a little while ago, and they must have shared half a brain cell among the three of them. The officer told them she was giving them a break, and they just had to pay the fare upgrade at the next station. They kept mouthing off to her as she checked other passengers' fares. Sure enough, when she pulled them off at the next station, she got out her ticket book.

    I could imagine a couple of Japanese passengers staring dumbfounded at these morons, who were essentially saying, "Yes, I want a ticket! No lenience for me; give me the maximum penalty!"

    --
    Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
  44. "Mindless Eating" by coyote-san · · Score: 4, Informative

    Somewhat related to a number of the comments....

    A book was published about a year ago, "Mindless Eating". It discussed the various factors that cause us to overeat and undereat. (The latter is a serious problem in combat situations in the military. It's one thing for a civilian to lose 20 pounds of fat, it's another thing for a fighting soldier to lose 20 pounds of muscle.)

    It's easy to say "eat less/eat healthier", but that requires far more attention than you realize. Marketers are NOT trying to get you to eat poorly, they just want you to buy from them instead of the competitor. If everyone wanted broccoli, there would be broccoli stands on every corner.

    Most people want something fast, cheap and filling. Chains have tried introducing healthier fare periodically (e.g., Taco Bell had 'lite' choices for awhile), but they weren't popular enough to be economically viable. But offer a larger standard drink or more fries and your sales climb, so you get a downward spiral that results in a pound of french fries and people drinking 64 ounces of soda.

    Worse, this "renormalizes" what people expect. Did you know that coke bottles were originally 8 fl oz? Then pepsi introduced a standard 10 fl oz bottle as a marketing gimmick. Vending machines stabilized things at 12 oz for a while (since you had to stay at the standard size to be sold in the machine), but fast food restaurants competed with each other with larger and larger cups, free refills, etc. You could always buy a smaller size but that's psychologically hard when you get half as much drink but pay nearly the same price.

    Ditto coffee. It used to be a cup or two in the morning, perhaps with a bit of cream. Then Starbucks came into the market and the sizes have not only increased, the amount of fat and sugar has exploded. People who would never consider drinking a milk shake every day (or even twice a day!) do this without thinking twice when it's a fancy Starbucks drink. If you want a cup (8 oz) of black coffee... good luck!

    I think the most telling story was some guy at a yard sale(?) who asked if the seller had any more dinner plates in a set from the 40s. He was holding a serving platter. Historically dinner plates were around 8", but now they're usually 12" (iirc), or over twice as much area. People tend to fill their plates so we're eating a lot more food without thinking about it. Now look at sit-down restaurant chains (Chili's, Olive Garden, etc.) They're selling presentation so they use larger plates than you have at home, and they fill those plates. It's not an exaggeration to say that they serve 3 or 4 solid servings, nutritionally speaking.

    This is gradual enough that most people aren't aware that it's happening, but we are eating a lot more food and finding it harder to eat the correct portions. How often have you seen a 6'+ adult order from the child's menu?

    Does this excuse people from TRYING? No, of course not. But arrogant "people should know better" tirades don't help since changes requires us to be aware of the subtle changes that have lead us to the current selections and portion sizes.

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken